Would you pay $5.29 to download and own a DJ mix? That is an interesting question Beatport is starting to ask with Beatport Mixes. What if by doing so the label and artist would get money? What if the DJ who made the mix would also get some money? With takedowns on Soundcloud happening often and publishers going after ISPs everywhere this could be the eventual future anyway. DJ’s earn 10%, the record label 60% and publishers 30%. The tracks have to be on Beatport or the the mix does risk being taken down. Beatport doesn’t take a cut but of course they will make their money selling tracks. For more of the details and an interview with Beatport’s CTO head to a detailed DJ Techtools post: click here.

“We’ve got all the details and an exclusive interview with the Beatport CTO on the launch of a brand new service they call Mixes. Mixes allows DJs to upload and sell their mixes legitimately and legally, with Beatport handling all of the payment to labels and performance rights organizations.” – djtechtools.com

Post navigation

19 Comments

This is a really cool idea, as long as (as mentioned) the tune is on Beatport anyway (although that does limit what mixes can go up if it’s featuring stuff that wouldn’t be on BP) to avoid IP issues. It’d also help move the perception of DJs from ‘just a guy who plays someone elses tunes’ to artists in their own right.

@Thomas… if i get your logic right then, because a dj gets paid for playing other peoples music he becomes an artist, instead of only being someone who plays other peoples music? hehe… don’t get me wrong, i dj too… :-)

No, it’s nothing to do with payment. My point is that a DJ can be an artist in his/her own right if they’re doing enough clever stuff with loops, mashups, FX, etc etc. Making what is essentially a new tune from other ones. That’s real DJing, not just playing tunes back to back.

I sometimes play at a night in Edinburgh where our setup is two laptop DJ rigs (one Traktor, one VDJ), channeled through an Ableton rig with an LPD-8 for glitching/FX – the results you can come up with using a setup like that mean you can start blurring the line between a club night and a live gig. Throw in two DAWs with MIDI controller keyboards for doing live synths/noise pads over the top with maybe a mic as well (also processed in Ableton) and the sky’s the limit.

ok… my line of reasoning too. although i’m surrounded by people who think that only vinyl is the thing, no matter how much i explain them the technical constraints or the pure irony of it when they play electronic music. but to get it back on topic here: i’m not really sure if that “Beatport pays DJ-mixes” really works or more precise, adds anything new to the world…

i guess in the case of beatport it really would be more like “promo-tastemaker-mixes” which could be a bit biased towards their catalogue. but hey, why not… no harm done really. personally i just prefer more the “adolescent mixtape romance” ;-)

20 years ago, no one cared that their music was on DJ mix tapes, and these tapes were being sold, and they weren’t seeing any money from it. Since, that WAS and IS the whole point of making this type of music, to be put into mixes. So what has changed now? Why all of a sudden does everyone insist on their tracks being licensed for use in a DJ mix? Has time brought on greed? The producers get their pay when they sell tracks. Anyway, now a days, DJ mixes are free. Maybe its because i don’t care about making money off of music, but i think this is a stupid idea. And just another way for Beatport to make more money. They’re slowly going to bully their way into the DJ Mix world, and no more free mixes.

Hard question, I guess generally it is fair to pay for music. Though, I don’t think the dj should be the one to make the money, mostly the producers have more pains getting their track down, than the DJ getting his mix done, his domain is the club, while he uses mixes to promote himself (ok, this is meant generally). I’m making an exception for those DJs who really put in a lot of work and mix loops and so on.
The other point is, that I have doubts, that the system will work. $5.29 does not really sound like a lot of money for an hour of music, but after so many people are used to getting mixes for free, it may be hard to convince them to spend an amount of money that really hurts their wallets (they are going to want to consume a few mixes per month, these days). I always wondered, why the music business did not adjust its prices to the internet. I mean, I used to pay 12- 15 Euros for a CD album. If I pay 1.29 Euro per track on beatport I will reach about the same price for the music, even more if I pay a higher price to get a high resolution mp3, without the joy of having a new touchable item with a nice booklet in my collection. Also, I’m quite aware of the fact, that download shops spare themselves the costs of manufacturing cds, having them distributed by real people and paying loads of staff to run their shops.
With the internet people have gotten used to consuming a lot more music than they used to, but they are probably not ready to spend more money. With prices like on beatport for nothing more than a lousy file download, it is no wonder a lot of people take to illegal downloads. Maybe prices should have long adjusted to that fact. Then, some people would earn less perhaps, but more musicians would get their share.
Just thinking.

I was thinking today right before I got on my elliptical trainer that I wish I had a really great techno mix to listen to. There are great mixes on Mixcloud but you can’t fast forward via mobile devices which makes them useless to me… I’m not listening to 1 minute of a bad song anytime anywhere. So then what? Go hunting forums/illegal sites? $5.29 would be convenient. This is just one small side of the view from a music lover.

I agree that 5.29 is fair. I was just wondering if the market will agree, too.
I still pay for my music, and I am happy with it. Good music is worth its price – to me. I was just giving some thoughts about the situation, since it is clear that download shops have to compete with illegal offers.

My idea was that lowering prices might bring more people back on the right track. You are a true music lover Oliver, who is willing to spend the money he has on music, all your readers know that. But the music sellers are struggling because the mere consumer has – for a relevant part – stopped spendin his money on music. I guess most beatport customers are djs or wannabes.

The idea is, that people will buy music, if the price for a single song does not get them thinking. In the end this could spill more money back into the industry.
I’m actually thinking about a little boy from my neighborhood, that I know. He wanted an iTunes account and was able to spend about 5 Euros a month on music. But when he figured out, he would have to make the tough decision which songs to sort out of those he wanted, he lost interest and spent his money elsewhere.
I don’t know, but I suppose he will listen to music anyways.

This is great! I already bought one of those mixes and it’s worth every cent. A great place to go to buy good music to listen to. And since I’ve been DJing at parties for a while using exclusively purchased tracks from BeatPort I may upload a mix of my own one of theses days.